EDITORIAL | If pupils err, forgive them. Not doing so could cost them their futures

Expelling pupils, especially if they are older than 15 or in grades 10 to 12, can scupper their chances of passing their end-of-year exams.

This is because provincial education departments are not obliged to make alternative schooling arrangements for them and so it falls to parents or guardians.

They can, however, ask education department officials for advice and assistance. In contrast, if an expelled pupil is in the compulsory schooling age group of seven to 15 years or in grade 9, the onus is on the departments to place him or her in another school.

A case in point is the recent decision by Ficksburg High School in the Free State to foist “off-campus education” on a grade 12 pupil, which, it can be argued, borders on expulsion.

The school’s governing body said “a pattern of serious misconduct” by the 18-year-old led to its decision. His crime: committing a string of transgressions which included disregarding a teacher’s authority, attempting to intimidate a teacher and threatening to harm another.

In about October last year one of the teachers was granted an interim protection order against the pupil after he barged into her classroom and attempted to provoke and intimidate her. She withdrew the court order in January because the pupil was in matric and had given her a written apology.

Serious transgressions which are grounds for expulsion in Western Cape, for example, include violent assault, sexual assault and dealing in illegal substances.

If he needs to ask questions relating to the previous week’s work, he has to write them on a 'question form' contained in a pupil pack he has to collect at the school gate on Mondays. He will only see the teachers’ responses when he fetches new schoolwork a week later.

The “off-campus education” offered to the Ficksburg pupil means he will be forced to spend the rest of the year studying at home as he is banned from direct contact with teachers.

If he needs to ask questions relating to the previous week’s work, he has to write them on a “question form” contained in a pupil pack he has to collect at the school gate on Mondays. He will only see the teachers’ responses when he fetches new schoolwork a week later.

The pupil is only allowed to enter the school premises to write tests and exams, under “draconian” conditions, according to his guardian. By way of example, his “prison-style” treatment includes being escorted by a staff member from the school gate to the classroom and back to the gate after his test.

It is indisputable that face-to-face teaching, including teacher interactions with pupils and vice versa, is crucial for learning to take place.

Public interest law centre Section 27 argues that while the pupil’s expulsion limits his rights, it has to be balanced against the rights of the broader school community. The centre for child law at the University of Pretoria, on the other hand, says his exclusion from school affects his right to education as he is, in effect, teaching himself and this will have an impact on his educational outcomes.

Will providing a pupil pack at the school gate weekly be enough to guarantee he passes the most challenging exam of his life? Sadly, the answer is a resounding no.

Our appeal to Ficksburg High and other schools is to not wash their hands of pupils who have been expelled or condemned to “off-campus education”. If they turn their backs on these teenagers they will be staring down the barrel of failure at the end of the year.

Instead, schools should make lessons available to them and provide them with intensive support.

Sanctions imposed must be tempered with love, mercy and compassion. Let’s not simply “write them off” or treat them as if they were criminals. The institutions would do well to remember English poet Alexander Pope’s words: “To err is human, to forgive divine.”